Debates of June 12th, 1995

Firearms Act

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

The Bloc members will vote in favour of Motion No. 21, but against Motion No. 227.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Are there any other permutations or combinations?

[Len Taylor, NDP, The Battlefords—Meadow Lake, SK]

Mr. Speaker, on Motion No. 21 New Democrats would vote yea, but I believe the whip of the government should be informing the House on why Motion No. 227 is not before the House.

[The Deputy Speaker]

The table officers who have been terrific will try to figure all that out and give us the count on Motions Nos. 21 and 227.

[John Nunziata, Liberal, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Could you clarify whether we are also voting on Motion No. 227? If that is the case I should like to be recorded as being opposed to Motion No. 227.

[The Deputy Speaker]

I gather there is no consent to do what we have been trying to do for the last 15 minutes.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if there is no consent to function as logically as we have just done, I would propose that the whips of each party indicate how the members of their respective parties will vote on Motion No. 21 and the subsequent motions and that the party whips be asked to indicate how their party will vote on Motion No. 227, more specifically.

[The Deputy Speaker]

The problem has been caused by the fact that in the confusion we were voting on Motion No. 21. The vote on Motion No. 21 also applies to about 15 other motions including Motion No. 227.

Apparently the Table can figure out how we have all voted if the government and all the other party whips will permit us to do the calculation and come back with an answer. Is that acceptable?

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there is some difficulty with what is happening at this point.

We were told that we were voting on report stage Motion No. 21. I believe, if you were to seek it, you would find the respective whips would indicate that probably everyone is voting for that motion.

However the difficulty is the following one. I believe the Chair is seeking, at the request of one member, to split the decision already taken by the Chair earlier today, which would have the effect of voting separately on Motion No. 227 and then on all the other motions grouped in that list of some 10 or 15 motions indicated earlier by Mr. Speaker.

I never understood that we could split a decision made by the Chair. If the Chair could explain that to us we could proceed.

[The Deputy Speaker]

The point is one that I think can be accepted. The Chair has made a ruling that the vote on Motion No. 21 will apply to all the other ones.

As the whip indicated, the hon. member for Scarborough West wished in effect to vote differently. However we are bound by the ruling of Mr. Speaker and therefore we will have to take a vote, I suppose on Motion No. 21, and it will be applied to all the others as indicated by the ruling of the Chair.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we could certainly quite reasonably follow a logic that does not stand up in order to follow procedure, because we support Motion No. 21 and the subsequent motions, except Motion No. 227. We could, therefore, battle over procedure, and all those watching us this evening would conclude that we are procedural experts rather than people who vote responsibly.

I therefore suggest that the House decide unanimously to vote on Motion No. 21 and the others and to vote on Motion No. 227

separately so we can do this a bit logically and so that people understand what we are doing here tonight.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Dear colleagues, is there unanimous consent to vote on Motion No. 227 separately?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker]

So we will vote on this motion separately.

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Speaker, now that we have separated the two matters, I think you could ask the House whether five members wish to rise and ask for a recorded vote on the group of motions you have listed, with the exception of Motion No. 227, which we will vote on shortly.

[The Deputy Speaker]

The House has heard the motion of the government whip. Do five members wish to rise as indicated?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Deputy Speaker]

All those in favour will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Deputy Speaker]

All those opposed will please say nay.

As there are no nays, Motion No. 21 is adopted. Accordingly Motions Nos. 22, 33, 34, 36, 47, 57, 72, 74, 80, 89, 90, 171, 172 and 261 are agreed to.

The next question is on Motion No. 227.

(The House divided on Motion No. 227, which was agreed to on the following division:)

[The Deputy Speaker]

I declare Motion No. 227 carried.

The next question is on Motion No. 26, but there may be some confusion. Do any of the whips wish to make representations?

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on further consideration, I think the Chair will have to seek the vote directly from the floor.

(The House divided on Motion No. 26, which was negatived on the following division:)

[Guy Arseneault, Liberal, Restigouche—Chaleur, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to be registered as voting nay on this motion.

[The Deputy Speaker]

I declare Motion No. 26 lost. Consequently Motions Nos. 37, 44, 46, 86, 94 and 96 are also lost.

Perhaps the government whip might indicate whether he thinks Motion No. 32 has been voted on. It appears it has not.

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in the essence of time and co-operation I believe there would be a disposition to apply the result of the vote just taken on the following motions proposed by the same hon. member: Motions Nos. 32, 48 and 62.